Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1996 16:52:05 GMT
Server: NCSA/1.4.2
Content-type: text/html

<HTML>
<head>
<title>CSE 321 Assignment #2</title>
</head>
<body>
<h1>CSE 321 Assignment #2<br>Autumn 1996</h1>
<h3>Due: Friday, October 11, 1996.
<br>

</h3>
<p>
Reading Assignment: Skim sections 1.4-1.8 of the text.  I assume that
you are already familiar with this material (except for pages 76-77, which
we may cover later in the course but probably not.)
The following problems are from the Third Edition of the text.
 
<p>
Practice Problems: page 19, problem 7; page 20, problem 25; page 34, problems
7 and 9;
<p> Problems: 
<ol>
<p><li> page 20, Problem 8.
<p><li> page 21, Problem 34.  Read the definitions for this problem above
problems 27 and 30.
<p><li> page 34, Problem 6.
<p><li> page 34, Problem 10.
<p><li> page 35, Problem 12. 
<p><li> page 35, Problem 14.
<p><li> (Bonus) 
Show that the formula FORALL x (P(x) -> Q(x)) is not 
logically equivalent to the formula
FORALL x P(x) -> FORALL x Q(x).
Give examples of predicates P and Q which demonstrate that the two
expressions are not equivalent.
</ol>
</body>
</html>
